re: What’s the poli board think about vaccinations

quote:

---

I really wish the downvoters in this thread would identify themselves and let us know what schools their kids attend.

---

90% of downvotes on this forum are awarded without reading the post and based solely upon the identity of the poster.

I think they’re great. I also think that the govt needs to stay the hell out of the argument. They shouldn’t have the power to mandate vaccination schedules. It should be a discussion between the parents and their pediatrician, just like every single other medical treatment.

You’ll get a lot of responses that it’s only liberal loons that are antivaxx retards, but you can find threads where the retardation extends to non-liberals.

A recent thread: LINK

They are endangering infants to young to be vaccinated and immuno-compromises adults. Their choice is putting others at risk. Should their selfish right extend that far?

A lot of these vaccination threads today . I think it’s their child and if they fell like it’s better to not vaccinate then it’s their choice. If vaccinations work then everyone else who gets vaccinations wouldn’t have anything to worry about.

quote:

---

I really wish the downvoters in this thread would identify themselves and let us know what schools their kids attend.

---

Vaccinate your kids effectively and don't worry about the other guys kids.

I don't think there's a logical argument against universal vaccination other than my simple, tin-hat:
I don't want the government to have more say in essentially anything.


Teenagers who have multiple sexual partners endanger all involved, too.


Bad choices that put other at risk do not necessarily insist that government intervention is necessary.



And I'm the first to more or less explain to the parents why they're idiots, and why if they and I don't agree on vaccination they can find another doctor- because there is zero compelling evidence that their stance is anywhere near appropriate.

quote:

---

Allergic history? H/o vaccine induced guillain barre syndrome? Etc.?

---

I should have been more careful in my 2nd attempt to address this, but the first time carried the caveat:

quote:

---

unless directed so by their doctor for a valid concern.

---

I'll even go as far as to not give the vaccine to a sibling of someone with a severe enough reaction if parent is worried enough about it and understands the low likelihood of adverse events, the benefits, the course of the disease we may not be preventing, etc. Informed decision making between a physician and a patient is a good thing.

There is an organization that exists to deal with the adverse reactions to vaccines. So how can you say there is zero evidence for people to do what you say without question?

There is zero reason for a Chickenpox vaccine but it exists.

You push too far people will push back. That’s what is happening here. Pharma and many many doctors are untrustworthy pill pushers so people are justifiably unsure of who or what to trust.

quote:

---

There is an organization that exists to deal with the adverse reactions to vaccines. So how can you say there is zero evidence for people to do what you say without question?

---

I never said there was zero evidence for harm. But the overwhelming majority of hesitancy isn't from a place of informed concern. It's from idiocy.

quote:

---

There is zero reason for a Chickenpox vaccine but it exists.

---

3,500,000 cases, 9,000 hospital stays, and 100 deaths a year prevented is no reason for a vaccine? The money from lost productivity from parents missing work alone is probably worth that.


I'm assuming you aren't in clinical medicine, because varicella has the potential to be serious and deadly. Reducing it is absolutely and unequivocally a good thing. And the best part? It cost about $300 for pharma to make a deliver it while making a small profit and tag it onto a doctor's visit that the kid is already going to for wellness and other vaccines which is entirely covered by every insurance plan by law nationwide.

9,000 hospital stays equates to about $16.9MM (average hospital daily cost x 9,000). And that assumes a single day in the hospital, on average, for those theoretical 9,000 cases.


For office visits, it is a little more confusing. I can't find a great reference for the average reimbursement of a pediatric simple office visit for an established patient. It's between $40 and $70, but that obviously leads to a huge swing. Still, at >3 million cases per year, if one out of three kids with chicken pox comes into the office, you're looking at a cost on the system in the tens of millions of dollars..for a totally preventable illness that can result in death and be transmitted to immunocompromised adults sharing the waiting room of a highly virulent/easily spread disease.


So, with that in mind, may I ask why there is "zero reason" for a chickenpox vaccine?

ETA: The $300 figure is the cost of administration by the for-profit entity Walgreens (or CVS....I forget who I linked) to a single child. I do not know offhand the amount of vaccines per year or annual cost, but essentially all of them fall under the burden of being "cost effective" in that the reduction in long-term morbidity and mortality is reduced by their administration. I can dig and find the cost analysis study somewhere but was sort of having fun with numbers from random sources but then realized that the "total cost of vaccination" number would be fairly helpful in the argument above.


ETA2- found one. Among other things, they estimate about 4.1MM kids born in 2006 would have had just over 4MM cases of zoster and an estimated 75 deaths (a bit off from the CDC 100 above, but this is specifically talking about the 2006 cohort of children only for the next 40 years of their life rather than their average lifespan, over which they estimate it would save approximately 20 more lives, giving you roughly the 100 quoted by the CDC) and estimates around $950,000,000 in net societal savings (included parent missed days, office visits, ER visits, medicines...) by using the standard 2-dose approach.


ETA3:

quote:

---

Pharma and many many doctors are untrustworthy pill pushers so people are justifiably unsure of who or what to trust.

---

Come in and have an informed discussion with your doctor. But if you're mistakenly uninformed- as I would have to unfortunately suggest by your above comment of "no reason" for a varicella vaccine, don't expect me to concede when I think you're wrong and have a litany of peer-reviewed evidence suggesting so when most of the arguments are "some vaccines can cause some harm" and "some vaccines shouldn't even exist"
While I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on both of these points, I can't say either argument is particularly no persuasive or mind-changing.


And to echo a prior point- the risk of harm to people without specific concerns (that the doctor would pick up on, like "they had x after the first dose" or "sister went to the hospital after this vaccine but is ok now") the risk is exceedingly low and in the case of a negative outcome there is essentially a built-in insurance policy to cover the care associated with the negative outcome. The presence of this policy/organization/fund is not a compelling argument to not vaccinate the "average" person. This is a general statement and does not address specifics at all- as I have been promptly called out on above and responded to.